Karnataka

Belgaum

CC/531/2015

Shirdhar N Jadhav - Complainant(s)

Versus

Chairman.Shri Ashraya Sou Cr Scty - Opp.Party(s)

S K Lad

23 Jan 2017

ORDER

                

ADDITIONAL  DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BELAGAVI

C.C.No.531/2015

 

                     Date of filing: 17/10/2015

 

                                                                  Date of disposal: 23/01/2017

 

P R E S E N T :-

 

	(1)	Shri. A.G.Maldar, B.Com,LL.B. (Spl.) President.
	(2)	Smt.J.S. Kajagar, B.Sc. LLB. (Spl.)  Lady Member.

   

 

COMPLAINANTS      -

1.       2.       3.

Shri.Shridhar S/o Narayan Jadhav, Age: 54 Years, Occ: Business, R/o: Navi Galli, Shahapur, Belagavi.   Shri. Pradeep A. Shettibache, Age: 40 Years, Occ: Business, R/o: Vadagaon, Belgavi.   Shri. Gunajirao Narayanarao Patil, Age: 68 Years, Occ: Business, R/o: Vadagaon, Belgavi.                              (Rep. by Shri.S.K.Lad, Adv.)

 

- V/S -

 

OPPOSITE PARTIES  -

1.         2.           3.         4.

The Chairman, Shree Aashraya Souharda Credit Society Ltd., C/o. 262/B, Khade Bazar, Shahapur,  Belagavi.   The Director, Shree Aashraya Souharda Credit Society Ltd., C/o. 262/B, Khade Bazar, Shahapur,  Belagavi.     The Manager, Shree Aashraya Souharda Credit Society Ltd., C/o. 262/B, Khade Bazar, Shahapur,  Belagavi.   The Officer, Shree Aashraya Souharda Credit Society Ltd., C/o. 262/B, Khade Bazar, Shahapur,  Belagavi.                           (Rep. by Sri. S.R.Sakri, Adv.                                         for Op.No.1 & 3)                        (Op.No.2 & 4 dismissed as per                                   order dtd:29.01.2016)

JUDGEMENT

 

By  Sri.A.G. Maldar, President.

 

1.      This is a Complaint filed by the complainant under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (herein after referred to as Act) against the Opposite Parties (in short the “Ops”) directed them to pay an amount of Rs.37,783/- with interest @12.5% p.a. till the date of payment and Rs.5,000/- towards Mental agony and harassment and Rs.3,000/- towards compensation and litigation expenses etc.,

 

2.      The facts of the case in brief are that;

 

          It is case of the complainants that, the complainants have jointly invested the fixed deposit scheme of Bhagyashraya Deposit of Rs.25,916/-  on 20.05.2012 under A/c No.150/52  for a period of 12 months i.e. 20.05.2012 to 20.05.2013 with interests @12.5% p.a. with maturity of Rs.29,156/- to the OPs society.

 

It is further complainants contended that, after maturity period, the complainants requested the Ops to release his F.D. amount. But, the OPs were not ready to disburse the above said amount and once again the OPs insisted to the complainant to keep the said amount for another 06 months and they will pay the amounts with further interest for said periods, believing in the words of the OPs society the complainant waited for another 6 months. But, the OPs society postponed the same by giving one or the other reasons. Hence, there is deficiency of service on the part of OPs, finally the complainant had issued legal notice to the OPs on 01.10.2015. Even after the service of the notice the Ops have not made any payments. Hence, the complainants have constrained to file this complaint.  

 

3.      The Complainants have also filed I.A. U/s 24 (A) of C.P. Act praying to condone the delay in filing the Complaint, for the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavits. The Complainant No.1 in his affidavit filed in support of his I.A., reiterating the facts stated in the Complaint contended that, after the maturity date, the OPs have failed to pay the matured amounts, despites request made by the complainants. Further, it is stated that, the cause of action the limitation only because of the OPs and their promise to refund the above said FD amount, not from the date of maturity, if that is so, there is no delay at all. Even otherwise, the delay from the date of maturity was unintentional and the same deserves to be condoned.

 

4.      After issue of notice to the Opponents. The Op.No.1, has appeared through his Counsel and resisted the claim of the complainants by filing his written version and Op.No.3 filed memo stated that, the written version of OP.No.1 adopt the same and the complainants counsel has filed memo stated that, the claim against Op.No.2 & 4 dismissed as not pressed in the above said case.

 

The OP.No.1 contended in the written version that, the complaint is not tenable as it is filed beyond the period of limitations and denied the deficiency in service and further contended that, the main contention of the OP is that, the complainants have not approached to the Sahakari and not furnished the KYC norms as required under law to claim the benefits under the I.T. Deductions and the complainants are not entitle for the interest as agreed, therefore, the OP prayed to dismiss the complaint.

 

 5.     Both the parties have filed their affidavits in lieu of evidence in support of their case. On behalf of complainants have produced 10 documents, for shake of our convenience we have marked as
Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-10. On behalf of OPs have not filed any documents. The Adv. for Complainant has filed his Written Argument and heard the argument of both sides.

 

Now, the following points that arise for our consideration in deciding the cases are;

 

 

1.  Whether Complainants made-out a sufficient cause for condonation of delay?

 

2. Whether the complainants have prove that there is deficiency in service on the part of the OPs for not settling the payment of F.D. amount?

 

3.  What order?

6.      Our findings on the above points are as fallow;

 

 

1.  Point No.1 & 2 in the Affirmative.
2.  As per final Order.

 

 

 

R E A S O N S :-

 

7.      Point No.1:  The case of the complainants are that, the complainants have deposited the amount in F.D. Scheme under “Bhagyashraya Deposit” on 20.05.2012 to 20.04.2013 in the terms of 12 months the said F.D. receipt produced before this Forum which is marked as Ex.P-1. Of course, the Complainants not specifically mentioned the date of approaching the Opponents demanding to pay the matured amount. Nevertheless, it is not in dispute that, the Complainants issued legal notice on dated; 01.10.2015 calling upon them to make payment towards the matured F.D amount. It is also admitted that, the said legal notice served to the Opponents.

 

The Complaints have filed I.A. U/s 24-A (2) of C.P. Act 1986 for condonation of delay before this Forum on 17.10.2015. The OPs has taken contention in respect of limitation that, the above complaint is barred by limitation and the complaint is filed beyond the period of the limitations. In order to prove this contention, the OPs have not furnished or substantiate with cogent evidence to hold that, the said complaint is barred. Hence, the contentions of the OPs it is not acceptable and it has no merit. No dought, it is true that, the complainant has deposited the F.D. amount in the OPs society and several times requested the OPs to make good and paid the maturity amount and even the complainants have issued legal notice to the OPs in respect of same. But, the OPs did not heed the request and not paid the maturity amount. Therefore, in our view that, the said contention are not acceptable and it has no merit and the complainants have established by giving an evidence and relied the decision of Hon’ble National and State Commission as below,

 

1. CPR 2013 (2) 443
2. CPJ 2009 (I) 78.
3. CPJ 2008 (III) 507.
4. CPJ 2009 (I) 200.

 We have gone through the above relied decisions of Hon’ble National Commission and State Commission, the above said decisions have been considered and the said decisions are aptly applicable to the instant case and further looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, we would like to refer a decision of Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ahamadabad reported in III 2004 CPJ 741, wherein the Hon’ble State Commission observe that, complainant demanded his amounts from the company/OP, limitation starts from the date of demand or refusal of payment, the said above decision is applicable to this complaint for the reason that, the complainants have issued legal notice, for shake of convenience marked as Ex.P-2 on dtd:01.10.2015 and further we would like to refer another decision of Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai reported decision in III 2005 CPJ 176 wherein the Hon’ble State Commission observe that, non-refund of maturity amount after the matured date, and further, the contention of OPs that, complaint barred by limitation not acceptable, the complainant has pardonable excuse, delay if any can legitimately be condoned.

The law laid down in the above said decisions and observations made, we are of the consider view that, delay has been condoned for adjudicate the matter though the complainants have legitimate right over the deposited F.D. amount. If the date of service is taken into consideration in this Complaint was filed within limitation. The delay has been calculated from the date of maturity which is incorrect. Actually, the limitation starts to run from the date of denial or from the date of demand, if this principle is applied absolutely there is no delay and it is within limitation in filing this complaint. The limitation cannot be computed from the date of maturity. It is clear from the law laid down in the above referred decisions, non-payment of F.D. amount always liable to be paid and the question of limitation arises either on the date of refusal to pay or from the date of demand. Therefore, in this case, the compliant has filed on 17.10.2015 in pursuance of service of legal notice, we are of the considered view that, the Complaint is filed within limitation. Hence, we answer the Point No.1 in the affirmative.

 

8.      Point No.2 : We have gone through the pleadings, evidence of complainants and as well as documents on records. It is admitted fact that, the complainants are the customers of the Ops society. The Ops society established with an object to help the customers of the said society. The Ops society has issued F.D. receipts to the complainants, the said documents of Original F.D. receipt which is already marked as Ex.P-1. Inspite of receipt of notice, the opponents have not bothered to pay back the complainants F.D. matured amounts, these acts of the Ops it amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the Ops.

 

Further, the case of the complainants are that, the complainant has claiming an amount of Rs.37,783/- for that proposition he has not produced any cogent document to hold that, the complainant is entitled for Rs.37,783/-. Hence, in our consider view that, the complainants have not entitled the claim amount, but as per FD receipt, which is already marked and it reveals that, the said maturity FD amount which has been maturity on 20.05.2013 for Rs.29,156/- and the said maturity has been not renewed, it is evident from the document which is marked as Ex.P-1. Therefore, the complainant is entitled for of Rs.29,156/-under F.D. A/c. No. 150/52 with interest @ 8% P.A. from the date of maturity i.e. 20.05.2013 till realization.

 

 

It is a duty of the OPs that, after the maturity of F.D. amount a mandatory duty on the part of OPs to disburse or settle the F.D. amount by giving the make good payment which was fixed by the complainants in Ops society, but the OPs failed to pay F.D. maturity amount and one or the other reason dragging and alleging untenable contention is amounts to deficiency of service on the part of OPs.  We would like to refer a decision of Hon’ble Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chennai in 2010 (1) CPR 62. Wherein the Hon’ble State Commission observe that, non-refund of maturity amount of F.D. amount, amounts to deficiency of service attracting Sec.2(1) (g) of C.P. Act and further observe that, Consumer Forum have jurisdiction to entertain complaint against the Co-Operative Societies.  In the law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court and National Commission regarding maintainability of complaint, it is aptly applicable to this case. 

Therefore, the complainants have jointly are entitled to receive the fixed deposited maturity amount as per the F.D. receipt amount of Rs.29,156/- with interest @ 8 % p.a. from the date of maturity till realization.  Hence, due to non-payment of F.D. matured amount by the OPs is caused mental agony and harassment to the complainants. In our considered view that, it is just and proper to award a compensation of Rs.2,000/- for inconvenience and mental agony. Added to this we also award litigation expenses of Rs.1,000/-. Hence, we answer to Point No.2 in partly affirmative. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following;                                             

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     

O R D E R

 

          For the reasons discussed above, the complaint filed by the complainants U/s.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is hereby partly allowed with costs and claim against Op.No.2 & 4 is dismissed.

 

The OP.No1 & 3 are hereby directed to pay the matured fixed deposited scheme i.e. “Bhagyashraya Deposit” amount of Rs.29,156/- under F.D. A/c. No. 150/52 to the complainants with interest @ 8% P.A. from the date of maturity i.e. 20.05.2013 till realization.

 

Further, the OP.No.1 & 3 are hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/-  towards mental agony and Rs.1,000/-  being the cost of the litigation to the Complainants.

 

          The order shall be complied within 10 weeks from the date of this order, failing to which the complainants are entitled to recover additional interest @ 1.5 % p.a. from the date of complaint i.e.17.10.2015 till its realization.

 

            (This order is dictated to the Stenographer, transcript edited, corrected and then pronounced in the open forum on this 23^rd day of January, 2017).

 

Sri. A.G.Maldar,     President.

Smt. J.S. Kajagar,    Lady Member.